[MUSIC]

Kousha Navidar: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Kousha Navidar, filling in for Brian today. Happy Friday. Coming up on today's show, our colleague, Liam Quigley, a reporter at WNYC and Gothamist, will share his investigation into New York City's tow truck industry. He found some unscrupulous business practices that's impacting street safety, insurance payouts, and more.

Plus, later in the show, New York Times editorial board member Binyamin Appelbaum will talk about how the drop in immigrants coming to this country does not necessarily mean more jobs for Americans. Ahead of Valentine's Day, we'll wrap today's show with a conversation about money. For you couples out there, how do you navigate it, both when you're just starting to date and when you've been together for a while?

We'll have a personal finance writer share some tips for how to manage money with your honey. First, today's the deadline for Congress to fund the Department of Homeland Security. By all accounts, there's no deal coming on the Democrats' demand for reforms in the wake of the shooting deaths of two protesters in Minneapolis. Meanwhile, border czar Tom Homan announced the immigration enforcement surge has ended.

Tom Homan: We've had great success with this operation, and we're leaving Minnesota safer.

Kousha Navidar: Border czar Tom Homan press conference announcing end of Minnesota surge, and we're going to talk about these developments, plus the importance of the House vote to end the tariffs President Trump imposed on Canada last year, and more with Susan Page, USA Today Washington bureau chief and the author of several books, including her latest, which is due out in April, called The Queen and Her Presidents. Welcome back to the show, Susan.

Susan Page: It's great to be back with you.

Kousha Navidar: Starting with today's deadline for funding DHS, let's talk about how we got here. It was after the shooting deaths of Renée Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis that Democrats demanded reforms to how immigration enforcement officers conduct operations before they'd go along with funding the government when that came up for a vote at the end of last month. The solution was to carve out DHS funding to give them time to negotiate with the White House on reforms, so where do those negotiations stand if they still do?

Susan Page: Well, they'll have to negotiate because they'll eventually want to open the government up again, but the negotiations are stalemated now. There is no prospect that the shutdown, the partial shutdown at midnight, can be avoided because Congress has left town for a week. We've got at least a week shutdown ahead of us for the Department of Homeland Security. On some of the fundamental issues like, can ICE agents wear masks, and should they be required to have judicial warrants before they go into someone's home? Those are issues that are not at all resolved.

Kousha Navidar: How far apart are they? You're saying stalemate, and you brought up the requests for agents not being masked. There's also needing warrant for arrests. That's on the Democrats, 10 items they had on their list. Was there a White House counteroffer?

Susan Page: Yes. Well, there have been some efforts by the White House to offer some compromises, including on provisions like body cameras on agents. That's something the department is now moving toward doing, but they're still pretty far apart. One thing that I think makes negotiations harder is that both sides see some political advantages to the position they're taking, the unyielding position they're taking. That usually is a sign that this is going to go on for a while.

Kousha Navidar: Is there any common ground?

Susan Page: Well, there's a bit of common ground. The idea of body cameras, that's something that's endorsed by everybody. On the big fundamental issues, which would be, does there need to be a major reset on how ICE agents behave? There is not much common ground on that.

Kousha Navidar: Okay, so Senate Democrats are able to block these bills because of the filibuster, which means that Republicans need to get 60 votes to pass a bill, which would require some Democrats to go along, right?

Susan Page: Right. They got one Democrat in the vote yesterday, John Fetterman from Pennsylvania, who does sometimes vote with Republicans, but no other. You're going to have to have some significant progress be made, and probably need to have some significant pain being shown from a shutdown to really push the negotiators together. That may take a while because while much of this department is going to be technically shut down, that does not include ICE.

ICE has plenty of funding. It does include the TSA. Now, when there's problems with the TSA, that has provided a lot of public pressure to make a deal on these shutdowns. TSA agents, most of them, will be required to show up to work even though their paycheck is going to be delayed. That's the same situation they faced in the last shutdown, which was a blink of an eye ago.

Kousha Navidar: I think it's really interesting when you talk about the political advantages to the stalemates in some ways, but that also makes me wonder about the narratives that each side is trying to control to justify the stalemates. Can you talk about that a little bit? What are both sides saying is the reason for no deal?

Susan Page: Well, the Democrats are focusing on the abuses that they point to in Minneapolis, including the shooting death of two US citizens. It is really the outrage about that that led us to the willingness to Democrats to stand up on this. President Trump and Republicans point to a desire to back up law enforcement. They also point out the simple fact that ICE funding is not affected by this because ICE got so much money in what's called the Big Beautiful Bill last year that they don't need money for a long period of time. For Democrats, this is the point of leverage that they have. This is a point of leverage that they plan to use.

Kousha Navidar: This is The Brian Lehrer Show. I'm Kousha Navidar, a host here at WNYC. I'm filling in for Brian today. My guest is USA Today Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page. Do you, listening right now, have a question about this DHS shutdown or other news for Washington for my guest, Susan Page? Is the trade-off of maybe longer lines at airports if your TSA agents are working, is that worth it if it leads to more rules for immigration enforcement actions?

Text or call us at 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. Do you support the Democrats digging in on this issue and, as Susan is saying, using the point of leverage that they have? Tell us at 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. Susan, we just got a text come in that I'd love to get your take on. It says, "How do Republicans defend not wanting agents to wear uniforms, identification, and no masks?

Susan Page: Their response to that is that they've had incidents where agents who are identified, who have a name tag, or even whose face is exposed to cameras have been identified and doxxed. Their families, they've been threatened. Their families have been threatened. That is the argument against setting a rule that you can't wear a mask if you're out there doing enforcement actions.

Kousha Navidar: Safety concerns for the agents?

Susan Page: That's exactly right.

Kousha Navidar: Okay, and Congress is not in session next week. If no deal can be reached today, when would funding run out, and when would the next vote happen?

Susan Page: Hours from now. I mean, for hours from now, from funding for the DHS, the Department of Homeland Security agencies that are covered, like the TSA and the Coast Guard and FEMA. It's almost like these government shutdowns have lost their ability to shock. I remember back during the Clinton administration, there was a big shutdown involving President Clinton and Newt Gingrich, who was the Speaker of the House.

It was seen as a cataclysmic development, and we covered every minute of it. Now, these shutdowns have become more common, and the workarounds have become more familiar. Government workers, I think, surely don't like showing up without a paycheck coming anytime soon, but that's something that's become familiar. I think that's become kind of a less. I wonder if you think that, Kousha, or if your listeners do, if it's just not as big a deal as it once was.

Kousha Navidar: It's such an interesting perspective. As you're saying that, I'm thinking to myself as well, like, yes, government shutdowns have just become more of the norm. I'm wondering for you, Susan, does the way that you cover that, has that changed at all, given the frequency of it over the years of your career?

Susan Page: Yes, we've become much more familiar with covering it, and we still cover it. Like these TSA agents, one of the stories that we pursued in the last shutdown was how the TSA agents were required to show up to work, but they weren't getting paid. The shutdown lasted for 43 days, which is a long time to go without a paycheck. Some of them were taking second jobs because they wanted to pay the rent and buy groceries for their families, and then that would run into the requirement they had to show up to work. It is still a serious matter, but it's a sign that I think, or in the-- Before in shutdowns, it was seen as this alarming sign of a dysfunctional government.

Kousha Navidar: Right, yes.

Susan Page: Americans now think, "Yes, the government's dysfunctional. Tell me something I don't know."

Kousha Navidar: Do you find some tragedy in there? I don't want to editorialize too much, but the government shutting down is not generally a good thing. If it becomes acceptable and even a point of political leverage, as you're saying, that has so many downstream effects, right?

Susan Page: Yes. Well, it can't be a surprise to any of your very well-informed listeners that the government's pretty dysfunctional, that the idea of bipartisan action on the biggest problems that we face has become a pretty scarce commodity. This is just one aspect, I think, of that phenomenon.

Kousha Navidar: Listeners, if you want to get in on the conversation, give us a call. Send us a text, 212-433-9692. That's 212-433-WNYC. Susan, we've got another text here. It says, "Maybe Susan can answer. In terms of these safety concerns for the masked agents with no identification, I'd like to know if there's any evidence supporting that claim. Please let us know." What do you think?

Susan Page: Yes. Well, the government officials say this has happened, and it's an experience that some of their agents have had. That's not a story I personally have done. I haven't talked to agents for whom this has happened. The safety of agents is something we want to protect as well, right? These are federal law enforcement officials. We don't want them or their families doxxed and harassed. I guess I don't personally know, but officials at the White House and at the agency do say this is an experience that some of their agents have had. I wonder if there are any ICE agents or their family members who are listening who might illuminate for us if they've had that experience. I'd be very interested in hearing that.

Kousha Navidar: Absolutely. If that sounds like you listening right now, please do give us a call. Send us a text. Susan, I think that's a fantastic idea. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. I'd love to bring in a caller here who has a question. Ben from Ditmas Park. Ben, hi. Welcome to the show.

Ben: Hi, thanks for having me. This may feel a bit off-topic. Of course, immigration is the topic of the moment and extremely important to be resolved. I'm glad the Democrats are fighting, but the last time we were dealing with a government shutdown, it was over this question of healthcare subsidies being extended. As an American whose health insurance went up $600 a month, whose monthly premium went up $600 a month, I'm wondering, is that conversation over? Are those subsidies just not going to be extended? Is there any conversation about that in this shutdown or in future negotiations, or should I just lose all hope and accept my $800 monthly premium? Anyway, thanks.

Kousha Navidar: Ben, thank you so much. Great to shift the topic a little bit and still sticking to this discussion about government shutdowns. Susan, do you have any sense about that? Sounds like Ben's health insurance has gone up a lot. I think he said by more than $600 a month.

Susan Page: Yes. Ben, that sounds terrible. An experience that millions of Americans have had, this spike in premium costs. If your premiums have gone from $200 a month to $600 a month, that is really an extraordinary jump. One of the things that we saw where some Americans who had been covered by the Affordable Care Act did not sign up again in January because of the spike in premiums. Some Americans, we think, didn't realize how much their premiums were going to go up until the bills started to arrive in January. We're still watching the statistics on what the impact is on healthcare coverage.

Ben, I don't think you should lose all hope, but I think you should probably lose all hope for this year because the Democrats hung pretty tough on the issue of the premiums, but they were not extended. It has now become not something that is going to get acted on. It's something that will be talked about. It'll be one of the issues that Democrats focus on in this midterm election year. If it's going to get addressed again, I suspect it will not be until next year.

Kousha Navidar: Ben, thank you so much for that call. Okay, let's move on from the shutdown and go a little bit into Minnesota. Border czar Tom Homan's announcement that Operation Metro Surge is ending in Minnesota. He's saying only a small number of federal agents will remain. He spoke of the successful results from the surge, but it exacted a human toll and a political one for the president, right, Susan?

Susan Page: Oh, yes, he declared victory and left town. There was a time when that was a suggestion on the Vietnam War to say we won and leave. That is not exactly what the Feds did in Minneapolis, but it sort of is, because the furor over the behavior of ICE agents and particularly the murder of two Americans created a national firestorm that the White House is still dealing with and prompted, I think, the withdrawal of most of these federal immigration agents out of Minneapolis.

Homan said they had arrested more than 4,000 undocumented immigrants, but he could not break down how many were actually had been convicted of serious crimes, which is the group of people that President Trump initially said he was targeting with immigration enforcement. Some of them are undocumented, but had no other crime. Of course, we saw abuses, the arrest of US citizens, and the abuse of those thousands of protesters we saw on Minneapolis streets.

Kousha Navidar: I want to talk about the polling a little bit and how it might be affecting the president. Is President Trump responding to polling that shows support for his immigration policies dropping?

Susan Page: He is, as presidents tend to do. Presidents tend to pay a lot of attention to their approval ratings. President Trump's approval rating on handling the southern border is really positive. The fact that we see not very much illegal immigration across the border with Mexico is something that Americans broadly support, but the tactics on the streets in Los Angeles and Minneapolis and elsewhere has been very unpopular. It's dismayed people who supported President Trump in the last election. It's caused some significant problems for President Trump and Republicans generally with Hispanic voters, which is a group of voters they did very well with.

I've heard from a Republican member of Congress that Republican women are a group that he's hearing from that don't like what they've seen on the streets of Minneapolis, including, for instance, the detention of that little five-year-old boy in a bunny hat. That is one of the enduring images of the immigration crackdown. I think that undoubtedly played a part in the administration's decision to, one, send Tom Homan there to try to lower the temperature and, number two, to say, "Everything's great now, and we can come home."

Kousha Navidar: We've got a caller in Newark, New Jersey. Tim, hi, welcome to the show.

Tim: Hi. My question is regarding ICE being doxxed. Now, our regular law enforcement, they wear their badges with their names and their badge numbers on their uniforms. They're not permitted to wear masks. Now, why is it that they are not allowed to wear masks and they have to wear uniforms? Why are we taking special precautions for ICE and not our regular law enforcement?

Kousha Navidar: Tim, thanks so much for that question. It sounds like you're asking about why is ICE getting maybe special preferential treatment. Susan, is it the safety concerns? Is it something else?

Susan Page: Well, I think Tim asks a great question, and that's a question that congressional Democrats have been asking as they do these negotiations on spending, that the standard practice has been not to have a kind of mystery police force out there. While you want to take steps that protect law enforcement officials, just the image of these heavily armed enforcement agents with mask over their face and no identifying information on their uniform is one that has just really set off alarms for a lot of Americans. They are asking the same question, Tim, is, which is if there's a way to make that work for local and state law enforcement officials, why not also come up with a solution that works for ICE?

Kousha Navidar: Let's go to Polly in Brooklyn, if we could get Polly on the line as well, because I think Polly might have a follow-up here. Hi, Polly, welcome to the show.

Polly: Hi. Thanks. Yes, actually, it was very similar question. I think I took some issue with the comment, "Of course, we don't want ICE officials to be-- They're federal agents. We don't want them to be harassed or whatever." It's not that I want people to be harassed, but they're certainly the least of-- In terms of who's getting harassed in this situation, I feel least worried about them as I do about American citizens and immigrant community that's being terrorized. Yes, it just seemed like a strange comment, "Of course, we want to protect them." I didn't really get the spirit of that.

Kousha Navidar: I hear you.

Susan Page: Well, Polly, we don't want to protect them from protest. Protests are an American tradition. I take your point there. It seems to me we also want a world in which law enforcement officials aren't doxxed and their families aren't called, and their homes aren't-- It seems to me we want to have the protest be directed at the offense. Man, that is really what we saw.

Minneapolis has a long tradition of protest and political activism. We really saw that on the streets of Minneapolis to some great effect, I think. I think that's one of the reasons that the ICE surge has pulled back. That is not how I would define harassment, but I guess I don't think law enforcement officials of any sort, I think they need to do their jobs in the right way. I guess I'm just generally against political violence against anybody, against activists on the street, or against agents with their families.

Kousha Navidar: It's an important discussion to be having right now. Polly, we really do appreciate you bringing that to light, and Susan, for you engaging in that. We're getting a lot of texts on this topic. We've got some folks that are asking, "Again, is there evidence of any actual danger to ICE agents?" which we discussed, Susan. We're hearing some folks saying, "How come no other law enforcement, police officers, other federal officers, and our military don't wear masks? Couldn't they also be doxxed?" A lot of folks wondering why the preferential treatment here and the evidence for it.

Folks, we're talking to Susan Page from Washington Post-- I'm sorry, Susan. We're talking to Susan Page from USA Today, the Washington bureau chief. We're discussing what's happening in politics right now. If you have a question or you have a comment, please give us a call or send us a text, 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. We're going to take a short break, and we'll be right back with more.

[MUSIC]

Kousha Navidar: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Kousha Navidar, filling in for Brian today, speaking with USA Today Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page. Susan, let's change gears a little bit. President Trump suffered another setback this week when the House voted to rescind the tariffs he put in place on Canadian trade. Let's talk about that for a second. Is this a turning point for Congress being a check on presidential power, or is that overstating the case?

Susan Page: [chuckles] Well, it's an action that will have no substantive impact but sends this huge message, because what happened was six Republicans joined just about all the Democrats to pass this resolution that's aimed at reversing the tariffs on Canada. Now, this is not going to happen. If this legislation ever reached the White House, President Trump would surely veto it, but there is a big message here.

It is one more sign of several that shows President Trump losing some of his grip on Congress. He still has a pretty strong grip on Congress. We shouldn't say he hasn't, but there is a little bit more willingness on the part of congressional Republicans to challenge President Trump or not to do what he's saying they should do or to risk his wrath. That's been pretty dangerous territory for Republicans last year because President Trump made it clear he would seek retribution against Republican officeholders who defied him.

You see it a little bit more. I think there are two reasons. I think, for one thing, the president is a lame duck, and that will be even more the case after the midterm elections. The other factor are those midterm elections where Trump will not be on the ballot, but a third of the Senate and all of the House will be. They are looking at their own political standing in their districts and splitting with Trump on some of the things that he does that cause the most consternation among their voters.

Kousha Navidar: While the president is in his last term and is a lame duck, simultaneously, these House Republicans are getting ready for midterms, where they feel the pressure, to summarize that. Is that a fair encapsulation?

Susan Page: That's right. Of course, it's in President Trump's interest to have Republicans do well in the midterms, but it's not his job on the line. There's a long history of presidents thinking more about their own legacy than thinking about the prospects for the people who are in their party and going to be on the ballot in a midterm election. It's not the first time members of Congress have been a little concerned about how the president of their own party is going to handle things.

Trump still has a lot of clout. He has a ton of money, more money than we've ever seen a president have to give in elections if he chooses to do that. His approval rating has been sinking into the low 40s and even into the 30s in some polls. That's pretty low for members of Congress looking at running again. On things like this, immigration crackdown, he has encountered increasingly negative poll ratings. Most important of all, of course, economic anxiety is one of the factors that we think will be most important in November.

Kousha Navidar: Impeachment comes to mind as well for President Trump. Is he worried about impeachment if Dems take control?

Susan Page: Well, I think he would prefer not to be impeached.

Kousha Navidar: Sure.

[laughter]

Kousha Navidar: You don't say. [chuckles]

Susan Page: Now, on the other hand, I think not much prospect he's going to get ousted from office. We've discovered that with impeachment. It's easier to impeach in the House than it is to convict in the Senate. I think he has, at times, mentioned his desire not to be impeached, and how that'll happen if Democrats win the House. I don't know how the Democratic calculation will go if they win control of the House, which is probably going to happen. Not guaranteed, but probably going to happen. It was a mixed political blessing for them during his first term. I don't think that's necessarily inevitable, but it definitely won't happen if the Republicans keep control of the House. It is, at least, in the realm of possibility if the Democrats gain control again.

Kousha Navidar: How about on the Senate side? Some Senate Republicans have also voted against tariffs. Would there be enough votes to override a veto?

Susan Page: No, there would not be enough vote. It is very hard for me to see the possibility that they could get enough votes to override a veto on a tariffs bill. The fact is we think six House Republicans voting with Democrats on tariffs was a big victory for the Democrats, but it's still only six Republicans.

Kousha Navidar: As you're talking about President Trump's perspective on things, it reminds me of something that you've written about, which is the so-called "second-term curse." What is that, and are these signs of it?

Susan Page: I look back, and I couldn't find any modern president whose second term was as good as his first. I think there are a couple of reasons why. One big reason is that I think in their second terms, we can see, historically, Republicans tend to overreach. It was in his second term that FDR tried to stack the Supreme Court. That didn't work out.

It was in his second term that George W. Bush proposed a partial privatization of Social Security, which proved to be a political disaster. It's in his second term that we see President Trump taking much more aggressive, broad actions than he took in his first term on things, including tariffs and immigration enforcement. I think that tends to rebound against presidents in their second terms. I think you can see some signs of that in President Trump's second term as well.

Kousha Navidar: Listeners, are you seeing signs of a change in direction in Washington, what Susan calls the "second-term curse?' Call us at 212-433-WNYC, that's 212-433-9692, and talk with us. This is The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Kousha Navidar, and we are speaking with USA Today Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page. Susan, there is also the federal court ruling blocking War Secretary Pete Hegseth from retaliating against Senator Mark Kelly over a video he and five other Democratic lawmakers recorded. What was in that video?

Susan Page: Well, this was a video that had Democrats, all of whom had served in the military or in intelligence agencies, stating the fact that military people in the armed forces are required to defy illegal orders, and didn't define what an illegal order was. This was at the point where we were first seeing those strikes on boats leaving Venezuela that were being bombed from above by US drones, but it didn't say what illegal orders were. It was, of course, stating that is true. People in the military are supposed to defy illegal orders.

Two things happened this week on this front that are so interesting. One is the court decision, the federal judge that, in really a scathing decision, rebuked the defense secretary on his actions to try to punish Mark Kelly for appearing in this video. The thing that was, I thought, even more remarkable was we saw a grand jury in Washington refuse to indict the six Democratic lawmakers who made this video. There's that old line that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor tells him to. That, on several occasions, has not proved true. The defiance of a grand jury on what federal prosecutors are urging them to do, I think, is really quite extraordinary.

Kousha Navidar: Let's listen to a clip, and then I'm going to follow up with a question for you, Susan.

Senator Mark Kelly: This administration is pitting our uniform military-

Senator Elissa Slotkin: -and intelligence community professionals-

Representative Jason Crow: -against American citizens.

Senator Mark Kelly: Like us, you all swore an oath-

Representative Maggie Goodlander: -to protect and defend this Constitution.

Representative Chris Deluzio: Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad-

Representative Jason Crow: -but from right here at home.

Senator Mark Kelly: Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.

Senator Elissa Slotkin: You can refuse illegal orders.

Representative Chris Deluzio: You must refuse illegal orders.

Kousha Navidar: That is a clip from the video that we are discussing. Susan, this ruling came just after a grand jury refused to indict the six senators and Congress members over the videos. Do you know what charges the prosecutors were going for?

Susan Page: They were going for a criminal indictment. I actually don't know exactly what the charges were. Maybe one of your listeners do, or maybe you do. I know that the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, accused them of sedition, which, of course, would be among the most serious charges you can make, but do you know what the actual criminal indictment was sought for?

Kousha Navidar: Not off the top of my head. If listeners do know, they can definitely call in. We'll try to get that immediately. Can you tell us more about what Secretary Hegseth tried to do?

Susan Page: Well, what he has tried to do against Mark Kelly is to discipline him, to lower his rank in the military that would lower his retirement pay, and use the findings against him in a criminal military proceeding. His threat against Kelly is a pretty serious one, and especially since Mark Kelly is, number one, a US senator, number two, someone who served with distinction in the Navy, and who was then an astronaut. He's a man with some standing to defy, I think, Defense Secretary Hegseth.

Kousha Navidar: We've got a lot of texts coming in. I just want to read a few of them here, specifically, about the second-term curse. We've got one that says here, "Regarding the second-term curse, all we see is increased unchecked authoritarianism." Another text says, "Where Trump is concerned, this is not a second-term curse. He simply wised up on what he couldn't do in his first term, feeling thwarted by the people around him. His instincts are the same. Now, he has recruited loyalists at all costs to support his policies." Some listeners out there are saying business as usual, same perspective, different time.

Susan Page: The one you just read, I think, is exactly right. One of the huge contrasts we see between Trump's first term and his second term is that he does not have those guardrails around him of more establishment Republican figures who said things like, "You can't do that," or "You shouldn't do that," or "There'd be consequences to doing that." It is true that he is surrounded now by people who agree with him and defer to him.

That has made him, I think, more willing to take the kind of really far-reaching things that some people see as extreme actions. When you do that, you risk a rebound. You risk having, for instance, a really terrible midterm election that changes control of the House, although with some difficulty of the Senate. I think that is one of the things that has happened that makes his second term so different from his first.

Kousha Navidar: Listeners, I appreciate you being able to pivot with us while we're talking about Hegseth, but there's just so many texts coming in about this second-term curse that I'd like to touch on that for just one more second because we have a caller, Nora from Sleepy Hollow, New York, who has a perspective on this. Hi, Nora, welcome to the show.

Nora: Hi, thanks for taking my call. The guest keeps referring to Trump as a lame duck and says he's in his last term. Does anyone believe he tore down the East Wing and is building a guilt tribute to himself because he plans to leave in three years? He wouldn't leave the first time. All of ICE, the raids, it's to provoke protests to the point where he can declare whatever is called the Insurrection Act and put troops in to control the coming elections. Look how he's taken the ballots from Georgia. I don't know why everyone assumes that at the end of his term, he will go gently into the sweet night because he didn't do it the first time. Most people will tell you that a failed coup is a dress rehearsal for another one.

Kousha Navidar: Nora, thank you so much for that call. We appreciate it. Susan, I'd love to get your perspective on this. It's impossible to foresee the future for certain, but I'm sure that a lot of people echo Nora's sentiments about not going--

Susan Page: Well, I know that there's alarm about that. I hear it from Nora. It's true that Donald Trump refused and continues to refuse to accept the results of the 2020 election, which was a while ago, even though that assertion has been debunked by the courts and by investigations, consistently debunked. It is also true that we have a constitution, and it has a two-year limit. That makes him a lame duck. Maybe things will happen in the future that we'll need to deal with, even things of a very serious nature, but he is a lame duck. We do have a constitution. I believe that the United States will stand behind that.

Kousha Navidar: Okay, let's pivot back to the topic that we were just talking about, which is Democratic lawmakers posting a video on X back in November to urge members of military and other agencies to refuse illegal orders, and a grand jury refusing to indict the six senators and Congress members over the videos. I want to play a clip of Senator Elissa Slotkin's reaction to the grand jury's non-action, then get your take on it, Susan. Here is that clip.

Senator Elissa Slotkin: Yesterday, 20 anonymous Americans, whom we will never meet, who made up that grand jury, told us more about the values of America than Jeanine Pirro or Pam Bondi or, certainly, this president.

Kousha Navidar: That was two days ago. I'm wondering, Senator Elissa Slotkin, on the grand jury that did not indict for the video, saying military members do not need to follow illegal orders. Susan, what do you think when you hear that clip?

Susan Page: I think about what Nora said and the alarm that some Americans have about whether our system's going to hold together. I think about anonymous people on a grand jury accustomed to taking at face value what a prosecutor tells them, saying no. That is the kind of thing that makes me think that our Constitution holds and our country holds. We have a time of great confrontation and division now, but we have, in the past, had that as well. Perhaps I seem naive to Nora, but I believe we get through this.

Kousha Navidar: Yet, Secretary Hegseth has promised to appeal the court's ruling, stopping the demotion of Senator Kelly, so this doesn't end here, right?

Susan Page: Right, it does not. Not surprising he would appeal it. We'll see. Everything seems to go to the Supreme Court these days. We'll see what eventually happens with this. These six Democratic members of Congress, as I said before, all of them veterans of the military or the intelligence services, made that video with the purpose of getting attention to the points they were making. Pete Hegseth is continuing to shine a spotlight on what it was they were saying.

Kousha Navidar: We covered so much in just the past couple of weeks of politics. Susan, first of all, thank you for pivoting with us and having such a broad scope on this and walking us through it. This might be an unfair question, but to just end things off, what are the vibes? Sum up the political calculations. Was this a good week for the president and his policies? What's the feeling right now in Washington?

Susan Page: I think there are some warning signs for President Trump, and part of that is the passage of time. On the other hand, you know what? He got good inflation numbers this morning. The jobs numbers were somewhat soft, but pretty good. If you're thinking what's going to happen in the midterms, the economy, "It's all always the economy, stupid."

Kousha Navidar: [chuckles] We have to leave it there for now with Susan Page, USA Today Washington bureau chief and author of The Queen and Her Presidents, which you can preorder before it comes out in April. Thank you, Susan.

Susan Page: Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2026 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.